tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post7024920977860029725..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Dear Dr B: What are the chances of the universe ending out of nowhere due to vacuum decay?Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91870479765628435762021-06-10T23:37:22.651-04:002021-06-10T23:37:22.651-04:00100^600?
But why do some sources say instead 20-3...100^600?<br /><br />But why do some sources say instead 20-30 billions of years till the decay (on average)? That source was quoted in Wikipedia until recently!<br /><br />https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/644718/8569portonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15294102622636468373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-73409466667505503812019-08-29T00:35:23.241-04:002019-08-29T00:35:23.241-04:00I've been wondering if there is another possib...I've been wondering if there is another possibility: a tiny, fractional "fall" into a slightly lower metastable vacuum energy level. Could there be such a thing? Not this major deconstruction of all matter, but a very slight drop to another vaccuum state that would therefore have slightly different laws of physics associated with it. If that's possible, what might that look likeBroken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86016026400530534292017-06-14T09:20:06.110-04:002017-06-14T09:20:06.110-04:00Richard,
Anyone who is interested in my writing c...Richard,<br /><br />Anyone who is interested in my writing can follow me either on <a href="https://twitter.com/skdh" rel="nofollow">twitter</a>, on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/backreaction/" rel="nofollow">facebook</a>, or on <a href="https://plus.google.com/+SabineHossenfelder" rel="nofollow">G+</a>, where I post (and discuss) links to everything I produce (including this blog). I don'Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88564054720620112302017-06-14T07:57:34.007-04:002017-06-14T07:57:34.007-04:00Bee:
sorry that this is off-topic but could you p...Bee:<br /><br />sorry that this is off-topic but could you pease let us know when and where you are publishing your commentaries, book reviews, and other articles (e.g. "Science needs reason to be trusted" appears in Nature Physics April 2017 which i just now discovered). many of us find your writing to be the most intelligent and thoughtful writing in the physics 'blog world' (naivetheoristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00425164894020381981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64495119390652043282017-06-10T04:22:19.571-04:002017-06-10T04:22:19.571-04:00Hi Sabine, thanks for the post. I think the questi...Hi Sabine, thanks for the post. I think the question is very interesting as to the boundary of science and what I call science-fiction.<br /><br />True vacuum: The only truth in this is expression that it does not exist in nature. So I see a lot of QFT (like e.g. the 500+ papers about a 750 GeV resonance that seems nonexistent), and it is possible to invent many artificial worlds - just change akidbellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12292741599925116131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-52262017137652721022017-06-09T13:29:40.074-04:002017-06-09T13:29:40.074-04:00"That life has been evolving for billions of ...<i>"That life has been evolving for billions of years, should give us confidence that life will persist on our planet for a long time to come."<br /><br />I don't know if it should or why it should, but it doesn't. If you think so, please re-read my remarks about inference.</i><br /><br />I think what was meant is basically Gott's argument: if we are typical observers, we Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-39864464970838476782017-06-09T12:43:33.640-04:002017-06-09T12:43:33.640-04:00Shayne,
I think I owe you another apology :/ My c...Shayne,<br /><br />I think I owe you another apology :/ My comment above was not addressed at you (in contrast to what I said later), it was addressed at Matthew (who brought up Leibniz - see his comment above). For what your comment is concerned, I think I largely agree. I'd like to add though, as I pointed out, that if one ignores scientific evidence, one has to take into account that one Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61670394368210942862017-06-09T12:23:50.254-04:002017-06-09T12:23:50.254-04:00Sabine,
My problem with your remarks to me is tha...Sabine,<br /><br />My problem with your remarks to me is that you're raising the specter of circularity and Leibniz and rationalism (pure logic being used to divine truths about reality) without addressing anything I actually said, which implies a sort of accusation that my views are tantamount to the ones you're bringing up. (If you don't mean to do this then why are we talking aboutShayne Wisslerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12087384827778308273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-42141965373950281472017-06-09T10:36:31.036-04:002017-06-09T10:36:31.036-04:00Michael,
It spreads pretty much like a phase-tran...Michael,<br /><br />It spreads pretty much like a phase-transition in a supercooled fluid. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o91iS4PRIQ" rel="nofollow">Skip to 0:20 in this video</a> and you'll see how it works.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75203828093434427802017-06-09T08:19:25.196-04:002017-06-09T08:19:25.196-04:00Can explain why a vacuum decay would then spread?
...Can explain why a vacuum decay would then spread?<br /><br />Also what would happen if the vacuum randomly tunneled to a slightly higher metastable value?Michael Mussonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17360143418083381579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-14103721914140731462017-06-09T06:29:48.716-04:002017-06-09T06:29:48.716-04:00the abductive reasoning method (proposed long ago ...the abductive reasoning method (proposed long ago by Pierce) is the research methodology used in much of theoretical physics, although many quantum gravity researchers have abandoned it (more likely, they never even knew of it) in favor of the hypothetico-deductive method (proposed by Popper and endorsed by Feynman). while you have addressed this in your Nautilus article "What Quantum naivetheoristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00425164894020381981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-73368723607009477322017-06-09T05:44:02.290-04:002017-06-09T05:44:02.290-04:00David,
"That life has been evolving for bill...David,<br /><br /><i>"That life has been evolving for billions of years, should give us confidence that life will persist on our planet for a long time to come. "</i><br /><br />I don't know if it should or why it should, but it doesn't. If you think so, please re-read my remarks about inference. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41854683030408438722017-06-09T04:56:44.780-04:002017-06-09T04:56:44.780-04:00"You can't base an explanation for natura..."You can't base an explanation for natural phenomena on logic alone. No matter how you turn it, you will always have to postulate something. And the only rationale justification for doing this is that it actually describes what you observe."<br /><br />Hello Sabine,<br /><br />It would indeed be ideal if we could always check if a postulate describes what we observe. Unfortunately, Koenraad Van Spaendonckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15090279727324831109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3112516862436756762017-06-09T00:22:39.220-04:002017-06-09T00:22:39.220-04:00Shayne,
Yes, it was a reply to you. Sorry, I forg...Shayne,<br /><br />Yes, it was a reply to you. Sorry, I forgot to address you. I didn't say *you* are circular. I am saying that the principle of sufficient reason better be sufficient reason for itself, or else why should it hold.<br /><br />More seriously, Leibniz got carried away by his belief in the power of human thought. You can't base an explanation for natural phenomena on logic Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17088868407828399752017-06-08T15:42:51.937-04:002017-06-08T15:42:51.937-04:00That life has been evolving for billions of years,...That life has been evolving for billions of years, should give us confidence that life will persist on our planet for a long time to come. A more immediate concern for humanity are the mass extinction events caused by asteroid impacts, and enormous volcanic eruptions as evidenced by the Siberian Traps, that triggered the Great Dying.David Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18048116250413347228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90507235975566579172017-06-08T11:28:57.983-04:002017-06-08T11:28:57.983-04:00Due to expansion of space, and especially the appa...Due to expansion of space, and especially the apparent accelerating expansion, extremely distant regions should be receding at superluminal speeds. <br /><br />If a false vacuum decayed in those distant regions, then the destruction & its consequences would never reach us -- yes?<br /><br />Since there's more volume of space in the distant regions of the spherical shells surrounding our TomHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13810033517103569254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28427017698388083132017-06-08T11:15:11.887-04:002017-06-08T11:15:11.887-04:00"The Principle of Sufficient Reason is still ..."The Principle of Sufficient Reason is still as circular as it's always been."<br /><br />Presumably this is in reply to my earlier remarks.<br /><br />No, nothing I said was circular. In order for an argument to be circular, it actually has to trace a logical circle, as in I *actually said* that the reason for X is Y, and the reason for Y is X, not *you* presume that I'm doing Shayne Wisslerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12087384827778308273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-67165627881210568112017-06-08T09:42:59.647-04:002017-06-08T09:42:59.647-04:00As for the physics we don't know, well a few y...As for the physics we don't know, well a few years ago the Higgs Boson was just a theory and this is one of many ideas about what the universe is like. It's my understanding that this vacuum collapse theory has a fair bit of implausibility written into it because, not only do you have to assume it didn't collapse for the universe to date; you also have to assume that the false vacuum Robert Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09620101579236252814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60720066133829813682017-06-08T09:11:03.943-04:002017-06-08T09:11:03.943-04:00I'd like to comment as someone who helps peopl...I'd like to comment as someone who helps people who are scared the world is about to end. Some of them wake up every day scared that the world is about to end, and the anxiety pervades their entire life. David Morrison who used to field the "ask an astrobiologist" column for NASA says he was told anecdotally via email of several suicides and there was one confirmed suicide by a Robert Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09620101579236252814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87332984778509478312017-06-08T09:09:26.986-04:002017-06-08T09:09:26.986-04:00I'm appalled that Dr. Hossenfelder would even ...I'm appalled that Dr. Hossenfelder would even bother answering such an inane, paranoid (and likely religiously motivated) question. More rational readers have gotten Bee's backhand over far less silly inquiries, and her tolerance in this case truly surprises me. Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13243006930165511059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82912816021702928572017-06-08T07:31:11.570-04:002017-06-08T07:31:11.570-04:00"Knowing" as a state of mind - yes, ther..."Knowing" as a state of mind - yes, there is a huge hole there.<br /><br />But known/unknown in physics is a quite definite thing, IMO.Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58663863596578928532017-06-08T02:13:09.509-04:002017-06-08T02:13:09.509-04:00There's a baked-in assumption within this exce...There's a baked-in assumption within this excellent answer wrt "known unknowns" (like the ones science can explore with more research) and the "unknown unknowns" (for which we cannot access or understand). Even with progress, the more vague can become clear – but that's not issue I raise. The assumption is quite reasonable, as all humans have similar biology and deal Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03150523741105681593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-65254785275402717192017-06-07T16:53:00.194-04:002017-06-07T16:53:00.194-04:00Deep cryogenic Bose-Einstein condensates of neutra...Deep cryogenic Bose-Einstein condensates of neutral atom ytterbium (arXiv:1412.5751) and lithium (arXiv:1606.09404) do not precipitate metal, respective boiling points 1500 K and 1600 K. Perhaps the current false vacuum has a protective footnote - or we have the wrong "Higgs" by 5+ GeV shortUncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5807717471720239362017-06-07T14:02:49.521-04:002017-06-07T14:02:49.521-04:00Greg Eagan's sci fi book Schild's Ladder i...Greg Eagan's sci fi book <i>Schild's Ladder</i> is an amazing story of a "false vacuum" with a lower energy state rushing outward from an experiment gone wrong. It takes place 20KY in the future and is quite minding. He's known for his mathematically oriented fiction. Also see http://kasmana.people.cofc.edu/MATHFICT/mfview.php?callnumber=mf338 <br />scott guerinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12237504731457401464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83591627292654137992017-06-07T12:21:26.165-04:002017-06-07T12:21:26.165-04:00Ah, now we must certainly feel "deadly" ...Ah, now we must certainly feel "deadly" grateful for this clarification, only that as Scott has it, most probably we will have to start worrying about those nukes...<br /><br />http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3294<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XacvydVrhuITheophanes Raptishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01269614280130174555noreply@blogger.com